Bragdon v. Abbott
United States Supreme Court
524 U.S. 624 (1998)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Abbott (plaintiff) had been infected with HIV since 1986. In 1994, Abbott, who was not yet experiencing serious symptoms of the disease, went to Dr. Bragdon (defendant), a dentist, for an examination. On the office information form, Abbott disclosed her HIV-positive status. After an examination, Bragdon informed Abbott that he had a policy not to fill cavities of HIV-positive patients. Bragdon offered to perform the procedure at a hospital, but that Abbott would be responsible for the cost of using the hospital’s facilities. Abbott declined and sued Bragdon under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), alleging discrimination on the basis of her disability. The court of appeals granted Abbott’s motion for summary judgment and concluded that her HIV-positive status posed no direct threat to the health and safety of others in Bragdon’s office. Bragdon appealed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether the court of appeals had sufficient material in the record to conclude that Abbott’s HIV-positive status posed no direct threat to health and safety.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)
Concurrence (Stevens, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Rehnquist, C.J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (O’Connor, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
